Cisco Support Community
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Announcements

You may experience some slow load times, errors, and slight inconsistencies. We ask for your patience as we finalize the launch. Thank you.

Welcome to Cisco Support Community. We would love to have your feedback.

For an introduction to the new site, click here. If you'd prefer to explore, try our test area to get started.

New Member

nat 0

if i use nat 1.....say

nat (inside) 1 0 0

global (outside) 1 interface

then outbound http works fine without any prob

but when i use nat 0...say

nat (inside) 0 0

then outbound http doesnt work at all

What seems to be missing?

  • Other Security Subjects
3 REPLIES
Cisco Employee

Re: nat 0

nat (inside) 0 0 without access-list is not recommended, you were doing it right way with nat (inside) 1 and global (outside) 1

If you do not want network translation from inside to outside, instead of using nat (inside) 0 0 use following static;

static (inside,outside) 10.1.1.0 10.1.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.0

which essentially is same as nat (inside) 0 0 i.e. not NATing

HTH

R/Yusuf

New Member

Re: nat 0

thx a lot...ive done that same thing already...so whether nat 0 or static gives me sme thing...and i just foung something...only the port 53(domain) is beeing hit on the sh access-list....the www is not beeing hit at all...ive tried removing the access-list in the pix but then i saw the same thing happeining on the ruter...

if u can help me again pls

New Member

Re: nat 0

Using static is better than using nat 0 with access list option?

Why?

Thanks

83
Views
0
Helpful
3
Replies